iHart expected to sign with OKC 3/$87

[Moose]

He just told you what it was. I knew it wasnt about the money. It was CLEAR to me that he was not HAPPY.
Money doesn't equal happiness. Doesn't matter if its 1 million, 100k, 4 million, etc
Once you pass a certain level- the difference becomes "stuff". He lifestyle wont change much between the 34 million guaranteed and the 58 million guaranteed. Not to mention, he would have made a lot more money in New York.
He wanted to play basketball to his fullest. Period. Ihart has a love for the game.

Let me ask you something...what do you love the most in this world? and/or what gets you the most excited when you do it?


why didnt he take the money?

Read on Twitter

He couldn't have left for the money too? Why would OKC offer so much more money per year than New York if iHart simply just didn't want to be here. Orlando was another possible destination but I doubt they were offering this much per year. I had mentioned that his role was reduced here and I have always voiced my concerns with Thibs as a coach but how can we ignore $16M per year versus $29M per year especially if Ihart thought he had more to show in his game and could possibly get another big pay day in a few years?

OKC provided the ability to contend with a young team and the possibility of an expanded role and a better fit but money definitely made the decision to leave easier.

Still I don't think we can continue to ignore those polls about players not wanting to play for Thibs, his style and the brand of basketball that we see on the court. It's not exactly pretty or fun and it hasn't led to great postseason success in his career. The game has evolved. He hasn't. A Thibs team in 2010 looks almost exactly the same in 2024.

Watch on YouTube

@ the bold...the extra money was a bonus...I'll take extra money every day- but I wont take extra money and "settle" on being unhappy. Thibs is obviously not the old thibs as described by Joakin Noah. However, he needs to look at the Ihart situation,
look in the mirror and ask himself can he be better.

I love to play the game of basketball. And I would not enjoy the game if my play was limited.

There has been zero indication that Thibs was the problem. In fact, you could almost argue the opposite. iHart developed into a different player last season. He found his role in the league.

Donte said there is no problem with how Thibs handles practices.

Jalen and Hart love Thibs.

Who has left so far because of Thibs (that we really wanted to keep)?

[JayTWill]

iHart is not a reliable player for most of the part... and even when he has a good game he takes many off plays... I dont care if thats because of his Achilles issues or a personality trait of him...

as for the passing, Randle is much better at all what he does on offense... you play Randle more at the high post when you play either small or with a rim running big or you play Randle at the low block when the other big is a stretch 5... same when you play small ball you can play him at the low block...

Randle
Anunoby
Bridges
X Factor
Brunson

You can't say this when Randle takes all of his defensive possessions off.

we were like the best defensive team in the league in january. what are you even talking about?

In 16 January games, the Knicks held opponents to 100.1 points per game. That’s the best defense in a month in terms of points per game since the Boston Celtics held opponents to 99.1 points in January of the 2021–22 season. The Knicks held opponents to 43.9 percent on field goal attempts and were the only team to give up less than 11 three-pointers per game. The 305 free throws they allowed were the sixth-lowest in the month.

January also...

Read on Twitter

The improvements in the defense in January were clearly because of the trade with Toronto trade and Randle was not a positive impact player for us (Edit- defensively)

Brunson, Randle, iHart without OG gave up 121.5 points per 100 possessions which is absolutely terrible
Brunson, OG, iHart and Randle gave up 105 points every 100 possessions when on the court together which is incredible but...
Brunson, OG, iHart without Randle gave up 94.5 points every 100 possessions.

[Context]

He couldn't have left for the money too? Why would OKC offer so much more money per year than New York if iHart simply just didn't want to be here. Orlando was another possible destination but I doubt they were offering this much per year. I had mentioned that his role was reduced here and I have always voiced my concerns with Thibs as a coach but how can we ignore $16M per year versus $29M per year especially if Ihart thought he had more to show in his game and could possibly get another big pay day in a few years?

OKC provided the ability to contend with a young team and the possibility of an expanded role and a better fit but money definitely made the decision to leave easier.

Still I don't think we can continue to ignore those polls about players not wanting to play for Thibs, his style and the brand of basketball that we see on the court. It's not exactly pretty or fun and it hasn't led to great postseason success in his career. The game has evolved. He hasn't. A Thibs team in 2010 looks almost exactly the same in 2024.

Watch on YouTube

@ the bold...the extra money was a bonus...I'll take extra money every day- but I wont take extra money and "settle" on being unhappy. Thibs is obviously not the old thibs as described by Joakin Noah. However, he needs to look at the Ihart situation,
look in the mirror and ask himself can he be better.

I love to play the game of basketball. And I would not enjoy the game if my play was limited.

There has been zero indication that Thibs was the problem. In fact, you could almost argue the opposite. iHart developed into a different player last season. He found his role in the league.

Donte said there is no problem with how Thibs handles practices.

Jalen and Hart love Thibs.

Who has left so far because of Thibs (that we really wanted to keep)?

I never said a philosopy (thibs philosopy) was the problem.
First of all, I dont think you are familar with Iharts game. Go look up how he played the game BEFORE thibs.
This is simple. Ihart wants to reach his full potential as a player. He can't do that playing for the Knicks.
It's not a problem but when you are 26- and you have another team that's offering you a chance to play your full game
and win a chip- you are going to take it.

Thibs doesnt care because he believes he can win with HIS PHILOSOPY. Hopefully he's right. If this team sures up the Ihart hole
then I wont agree or disagree with Thibs but if we dont win with HIS philosopy. Then Thibs needs to look in the mirror and open
his mind. If you keep doing the same thing and you get the same results. It's time to do something different.

[3toheadmelo]

You can't say this when Randle takes all of his defensive possessions off.

we were like the best defensive team in the league in january. what are you even talking about?

In 16 January games, the Knicks held opponents to 100.1 points per game. That’s the best defense in a month in terms of points per game since the Boston Celtics held opponents to 99.1 points in January of the 2021–22 season. The Knicks held opponents to 43.9 percent on field goal attempts and were the only team to give up less than 11 three-pointers per game. The 305 free throws they allowed were the sixth-lowest in the month.

January also...

Read on Twitter

The improvements in the defense in January were clearly because of the trade with Toronto trade and Randle was not a positive impact player for us.

Brunson, Randle, iHart without OG gave up 121.5 points per 100 possessions which is absolutely terrible
Brunson, OG, iHart and Randle gave up 105 points every 100 possessions when on the court together which is incredible but...
Brunson, OG, iHart without Randle gave up 94.5 points every 100 possessions.

Ah the classic random clips that don’t tell the whole story. And replacing RJ with OG definitely helped defensively. Somehow with “Randle taking every single defensive play off” the Knicks still were the best defensive team in the league. How that make sense?

Ima just leave this here. The team was obviously better with Randle. Saying he wasn’t a positive impact player simply isn’t true.

Read on Twitter

Randle also had an impressive effect on the Knicks' offense, taking it from 113 points per 100 possessions when he was off the court to 120 when was playing.

[Moose]

Watch on YouTube

@ the bold...the extra money was a bonus...I'll take extra money every day- but I wont take extra money and "settle" on being unhappy. Thibs is obviously not the old thibs as described by Joakin Noah. However, he needs to look at the Ihart situation,
look in the mirror and ask himself can he be better.

I love to play the game of basketball. And I would not enjoy the game if my play was limited.

There has been zero indication that Thibs was the problem. In fact, you could almost argue the opposite. iHart developed into a different player last season. He found his role in the league.

Donte said there is no problem with how Thibs handles practices.

Jalen and Hart love Thibs.

Who has left so far because of Thibs (that we really wanted to keep)?

I never said a philosopy (thibs philosopy) was the problem.
First of all, I dont think you are familar with Iharts game. Go look up how he played the game BEFORE thibs.
This is simple. Ihart wants to reach his full potential as a player. He can't do that playing for the Knicks.
It's not a problem but when you are 26- and you have another team that's offering you a chance to play your full game
and win a chip- you are going to take it.

Thibs doesnt care because he believes he can win with HIS PHILOSOPY. Hopefully he's right. If this team sures up the Ihart hole
then I wont agree or disagree with Thibs but if we dont win with HIS philosopy. Then Thibs needs to look in the mirror and open
his mind. If you keep doing the same thing and you get the same results. It's time to do something different.

I'm not sure where this is coming from. And what do you mean by win? A championship? That's incredibly difficult.

Thibs has already shown he can win in this league.

And he also has Noah who had a productive career with Thibs and ended up making a lot of money in his career.

Thibs is not perfect, by any stretch, but this argument is setting him up for failure and is based on a lot of assumptions.

iHart may get to shoot threes and play 34 minutes a night. With Mitch here, at most he would get is 28 if everyone was healthy, and we don't need iHart shooting threes or handling the ball as much if that's the case.

Based on reports and his own teammates, it sounds like iHart did want to stay, but passing up that money for 2-3 years of your life is something most people wouldn't do.

If it doesn't work out, he gets to leave the Thunder in 2-3 years, but will have a lot of cash to go with it.

I don't think losing iHart had anything to do with Thibs, even if iHart was offered an expanded role on offense with the Thunder.

[JayTWill]

He couldn't have left for the money too? Why would OKC offer so much more money per year than New York if iHart simply just didn't want to be here. Orlando was another possible destination but I doubt they were offering this much per year. I had mentioned that his role was reduced here and I have always voiced my concerns with Thibs as a coach but how can we ignore $16M per year versus $29M per year especially if Ihart thought he had more to show in his game and could possibly get another big pay day in a few years?

OKC provided the ability to contend with a young team and the possibility of an expanded role and a better fit but money definitely made the decision to leave easier.

Still I don't think we can continue to ignore those polls about players not wanting to play for Thibs, his style and the brand of basketball that we see on the court. It's not exactly pretty or fun and it hasn't led to great postseason success in his career. The game has evolved. He hasn't. A Thibs team in 2010 looks almost exactly the same in 2024.

Watch on YouTube

@ the bold...the extra money was a bonus...I'll take extra money every day- but I wont take extra money and "settle" on being unhappy. Thibs is obviously not the old thibs as described by Joakin Noah. However, he needs to look at the Ihart situation,
look in the mirror and ask himself can he be better.

I love to play the game of basketball. And I would not enjoy the game if my play was limited.

There has been zero indication that Thibs was the problem. In fact, you could almost argue the opposite. iHart developed into a different player last season. He found his role in the league.

Donte said there is no problem with how Thibs handles practices.

Jalen and Hart love Thibs.

Who has left so far because of Thibs (that we really wanted to keep)?

Thibs didn't develop iHart. That is just the narrative we have created on this board with some people calling him the big man whisperer. iHarts shot attempts dropped from 15 every 100 possessions to 10. He assisted on 20% of the field goals made in LA. It dropped to 8% here ticking back up to 13% last year with the team decimated by injuries. His time per touch went from 2 seconds to 1.5 seconds. His block percentage went down. The 3 point shot was completely removed from his game. The only thing he really improved on here was he fouled a little less and his offensive rebounding since he was less involved in other aspects of the offense.
iHart clearly felt he had more to offer to the team than he was allowed to show.

I'm not saying that everyone hates Thibs. I'm sure there are players that have loved playing for him but the anonymous polls say players around the league don't want to play for Thibs. Plenty of guys that have played for him have had their complaints and that is with most players being professional enough to not throw someone under the bus.

I'm not sure if I ever heard Obi say anything negative about Thibs publicly but the leaked audio clearly showed he was not a huge fan of Thibs. The Nova guys are very professional about how they go about their jobs but Josh might be the clearest window into how Thibs operates with his jokes and how freely he speaks.

He openly complains about his minutes but he will still be a professional and go out and do whatever is asked from him. He will go on the podcast and joke about why the hell he is standing in the corner doing nothing while being guarded by old ass Joe Ingles. He was on the finals broadcast talking about how Dallas will struggle to win playing at a slow pace with the ball being dominated by 1-2 guys when that is exactly how Thibs' offense has worked for years. Josh actually openly and frequently disagrees with Thibs but he does it in a playful way with his charm that actually doesn't come off as offensive.

[Context]

There has been zero indication that Thibs was the problem. In fact, you could almost argue the opposite. iHart developed into a different player last season. He found his role in the league.

Donte said there is no problem with how Thibs handles practices.

Jalen and Hart love Thibs.

Who has left so far because of Thibs (that we really wanted to keep)?

I never said a philosopy (thibs philosopy) was the problem.
First of all, I dont think you are familar with Iharts game. Go look up how he played the game BEFORE thibs.
This is simple. Ihart wants to reach his full potential as a player. He can't do that playing for the Knicks.
It's not a problem but when you are 26- and you have another team that's offering you a chance to play your full game
and win a chip- you are going to take it.

Thibs doesnt care because he believes he can win with HIS PHILOSOPY. Hopefully he's right. If this team sures up the Ihart hole
then I wont agree or disagree with Thibs but if we dont win with HIS philosopy. Then Thibs needs to look in the mirror and open
his mind. If you keep doing the same thing and you get the same results. It's time to do something different.

I'm not sure where this is coming from. And what do you mean by win? A championship? That's incredibly difficult.

Thibs has already shown he can win in this league.

And he also has Noah who had a productive career with Thibs and ended up making a lot of money in his career.

Thibs is not perfect, by any stretch, but this argument is setting him up for failure and is based on a lot of assumptions.

iHart may get to shoot threes and play 34 minutes a night. With Mitch here, at most he would get is 28 if everyone was healthy, and we don't need iHart shooting threes or handling the ball as much if that's the case.

Based on reports and his own teammates, it sounds like iHart did want to stay, but passing up that money for 2-3 years of your life is something most people wouldn't do.

If it doesn't work out, he gets to leave the Thunder in 2-3 years, but will have a lot of cash to go with it.

I don't think losing iHart had anything to do with Thibs, even if iHart was offered an expanded role on offense with the Thunder.

Did you listen to Iharts entire "post OKC signing interview"? we dont need reports -we can listen to the words out of his mouth.
He didnt just talk about shooting three's. Ihart has a lot of potential and flashed a ton of it. I didnt even know he shot threes
and had a bigger game until I researched him recently. Even Mitch has a bigger game- yet, he's not playing it...
This is a result of Thibs...

And yes I was talking about championship. The celtics have 18 and the lakers have 17. That proves its not hard. It's not easy either. But it starts with having a winning mentality and disecting how the winners win. Thibs is a great coach but to this point
he does not have one 1 chip as a head coach.

It's up to him to look in the mirror and figureout how to "grow". All I can do is listen to the words of a player and make a judgement. Ihart left so he could "grow". And thats what every human being should strive for - growth.

Like I said - I hope Thibs gets the cream of the crop when it comes to the pieces he needs to execute his philosopy. Seems like he has all of them expect for a center to work with Mitch.

However, one weakness that I hope he learned from is "depth". He should have 15 guys ready -that he trusts- that can step in and play in a play-off game. Almost every player played until they were injured and couldnt play. We can not see that again.

[Context]

Watch on YouTube

@ the bold...the extra money was a bonus...I'll take extra money every day- but I wont take extra money and "settle" on being unhappy. Thibs is obviously not the old thibs as described by Joakin Noah. However, he needs to look at the Ihart situation,
look in the mirror and ask himself can he be better.

I love to play the game of basketball. And I would not enjoy the game if my play was limited.

There has been zero indication that Thibs was the problem. In fact, you could almost argue the opposite. iHart developed into a different player last season. He found his role in the league.

Donte said there is no problem with how Thibs handles practices.

Jalen and Hart love Thibs.

Who has left so far because of Thibs (that we really wanted to keep)?

Thibs didn't develop iHart. That is just the narrative we have created on this board with some people calling him the big man whisperer. iHarts shot attempts dropped from 15 every 100 possessions to 10. He assisted on 20% of the field goals made in LA. It dropped to 8% here ticking back up to 13% last year with the team decimated by injuries. His time per touch went from 2 seconds to 1.5 seconds. His block percentage went down. The 3 point shot was completely removed from his game. The only thing he really improved on here was he fouled a little less and his offensive rebounding since he was less involved in other aspects of the offense.
iHart clearly felt he had more to offer to the team than he was allowed to show.

I'm not saying that everyone hates Thibs. I'm sure there are players that have loved playing for him but the anonymous polls say players around the league don't want to play for Thibs. Plenty of guys that have played for him have had their complaints and that is with most players being professional enough to not throw someone under the bus.

I'm not sure if I ever heard Obi say anything negative about Thibs publicly but the leaked audio clearly showed he was not a huge fan of Thibs. The Nova guys are very professional about how they go about their jobs but Josh might be the clearest window into how Thibs operates with his jokes and how freely he speaks.

He openly complains about his minutes but he will still be a professional and go out and do whatever is asked from him. He will go on the podcast and joke about why the hell he is standing in the corner doing nothing while being guarded by old ass Joe Ingles. He was on the finals broadcast talking about how Dallas will struggle to win playing at a slow pace with the ball being dominated by 1-2 guys when that is exactly how Thibs' offense has worked for years. Josh actually openly and frequently disagrees with Thibs but he does it in a playful way with his charm that actually doesn't come off as offensive.

Growth never stops and Thibs should take Ihart leaving as a Mirror check...
I was happy to find out that Ihart left because he wanted a bigger role or wanted to play basketball. I couldnt understand
why a millionaire would leave this team for more millions. I was very disappointed with Ihart but know I'm at peace with his decision. I would have done the same.

[Phish Tank]

Few things we probably gotta squash in here:

1) $24M is no chump change. For big men, who're bound to suffer injuries at some point in their careers, they should never turn out that type of money. This really is the paramount decision to leave New York and I don't blame IHart.

2) The expanded role narrative is a bit misguided. First off, we have to understand that Clippers situation a little bit clearer. That year, the Clippers did not have a real PG. Their distributors were PG, Eric Bledsoe, and Reggie Jackson. When you have that type of situation, there's more latitude to create with the ball.

Everyone knows that the Thibs offense is much more slowed down and a lot of isolation compared to other teams. Also, big men in particular are not encouraged to expand their game until they focus on the bread and butter. However, that isn't the case across the board all the time. Randle, for example, is a "big man" but he expanded is range exponentially and his passing chops while under Thibs.

However, when your touches are cannibalized by Brunson & Randle, there isn't a runway to pass as often as you did in previous stops.

As for the shooting, that's largely a farce. He was never a serious 3 point shooter with the Clippers. That was never tested across a long time. Him shooting 3s means that he'd not be doing things essential for the Knicks offense, such as grabbing offensive rebounds, setting key screens, etc. etc. That means no floaters. Are you trading that off for maybe shooting 33% from 3 on average volume? Let's be real.

[JayTWill]

we were like the best defensive team in the league in january. what are you even talking about?

January also...

Read on Twitter

The improvements in the defense in January were clearly because of the trade with Toronto trade and Randle was not a positive impact player for us.

Brunson, Randle, iHart without OG gave up 121.5 points per 100 possessions which is absolutely terrible
Brunson, OG, iHart and Randle gave up 105 points every 100 possessions when on the court together which is incredible but...
Brunson, OG, iHart without Randle gave up 94.5 points every 100 possessions.

Ah the classic random clips that don’t tell the whole story. And replacing RJ with OG definitely helped defensively. Somehow with “Randle taking every single defensive play off” the Knicks still were the best defensive team in the league. How that make sense?

Ima just leave this here. The team was obviously better with Randle. Saying he wasn’t a positive impact player simply isn’t true.

Read on Twitter

Randle also had an impressive effect on the Knicks' offense, taking it from 113 points per 100 possessions when he was off the court to 120 when was playing.

I meant he wasn't a positive impact player defensively. I had deleted that part when shortening my post. Sorry.

Does he take every single play off defensively? No. Was the team better this year defensively without him on the court? Yes. Would they have been the best defensive team for that month without Randle? I think so.

The clip I posted was just to show that January wasn't some perfect magical month. It was a clip of Randle in a difficult moment banged up with Brunson injured in a close game with a few minutes left and needing him to step up as a leader. The video showed what he did. Defensively he has far too many moments like that. That was actually my biggest issue with him in the playoffs last year. Not his shooting or mistakes. Just his effort in certain moments especially on the defensive end when he was needed.

[Moose]

There has been zero indication that Thibs was the problem. In fact, you could almost argue the opposite. iHart developed into a different player last season. He found his role in the league.

Donte said there is no problem with how Thibs handles practices.

Jalen and Hart love Thibs.

Who has left so far because of Thibs (that we really wanted to keep)?

Thibs didn't develop iHart. That is just the narrative we have created on this board with some people calling him the big man whisperer. iHarts shot attempts dropped from 15 every 100 possessions to 10. He assisted on 20% of the field goals made in LA. It dropped to 8% here ticking back up to 13% last year with the team decimated by injuries. His time per touch went from 2 seconds to 1.5 seconds. His block percentage went down. The 3 point shot was completely removed from his game. The only thing he really improved on here was he fouled a little less and his offensive rebounding since he was less involved in other aspects of the offense.
iHart clearly felt he had more to offer to the team than he was allowed to show.

I'm not saying that everyone hates Thibs. I'm sure there are players that have loved playing for him but the anonymous polls say players around the league don't want to play for Thibs. Plenty of guys that have played for him have had their complaints and that is with most players being professional enough to not throw someone under the bus.

I'm not sure if I ever heard Obi say anything negative about Thibs publicly but the leaked audio clearly showed he was not a huge fan of Thibs. The Nova guys are very professional about how they go about their jobs but Josh might be the clearest window into how Thibs operates with his jokes and how freely he speaks.

He openly complains about his minutes but he will still be a professional and go out and do whatever is asked from him. He will go on the podcast and joke about why the hell he is standing in the corner doing nothing while being guarded by old ass Joe Ingles. He was on the finals broadcast talking about how Dallas will struggle to win playing at a slow pace with the ball being dominated by 1-2 guys when that is exactly how Thibs' offense has worked for years. Josh actually openly and frequently disagrees with Thibs but he does it in a playful way with his charm that actually doesn't come off as offensive.

Growth never stops and Thibs should take Ihart leaving as a Mirror check...
I was happy to find out that Ihart left because he wanted a bigger role or wanted to play basketball. I couldnt understand
why a millionaire would leave this team for more millions. I was very disappointed with Ihart but know I'm at peace with his decision. I would have done the same.

No reason to be disappointed with iHart. He doesn't owe us anything. And not sure why the need to feel at peace with his decision, but it seems like in order to get there, you are pinning it on Thibs. I mean, maybe it's true, but I don't see it that way.

iHart highlighted some reasons to why he signed. Just like when Mike Hampton mentioned the Colorado school system as a reason to leave the Mets back in the day.

If the money was equal, do you honestly believe iHart would have went to the Thunder? I don't, but again, maybe I'm wrong.

[Context]

Thibs didn't develop iHart. That is just the narrative we have created on this board with some people calling him the big man whisperer. iHarts shot attempts dropped from 15 every 100 possessions to 10. He assisted on 20% of the field goals made in LA. It dropped to 8% here ticking back up to 13% last year with the team decimated by injuries. His time per touch went from 2 seconds to 1.5 seconds. His block percentage went down. The 3 point shot was completely removed from his game. The only thing he really improved on here was he fouled a little less and his offensive rebounding since he was less involved in other aspects of the offense.
iHart clearly felt he had more to offer to the team than he was allowed to show.

I'm not saying that everyone hates Thibs. I'm sure there are players that have loved playing for him but the anonymous polls say players around the league don't want to play for Thibs. Plenty of guys that have played for him have had their complaints and that is with most players being professional enough to not throw someone under the bus.

I'm not sure if I ever heard Obi say anything negative about Thibs publicly but the leaked audio clearly showed he was not a huge fan of Thibs. The Nova guys are very professional about how they go about their jobs but Josh might be the clearest window into how Thibs operates with his jokes and how freely he speaks.

He openly complains about his minutes but he will still be a professional and go out and do whatever is asked from him. He will go on the podcast and joke about why the hell he is standing in the corner doing nothing while being guarded by old ass Joe Ingles. He was on the finals broadcast talking about how Dallas will struggle to win playing at a slow pace with the ball being dominated by 1-2 guys when that is exactly how Thibs' offense has worked for years. Josh actually openly and frequently disagrees with Thibs but he does it in a playful way with his charm that actually doesn't come off as offensive.

Growth never stops and Thibs should take Ihart leaving as a Mirror check...
I was happy to find out that Ihart left because he wanted a bigger role or wanted to play basketball. I couldnt understand
why a millionaire would leave this team for more millions. I was very disappointed with Ihart but know I'm at peace with his decision. I would have done the same.

No reason to be disappointed with iHart. He doesn't owe us anything. And not sure why the need to feel at peace with his decision, but it seems like in order to get there, you are pinning it on Thibs. I mean, maybe it's true, but I don't see it that way.

iHart highlighted some reasons to why he signed. Just like when Mike Hampton mentioned the Colorado school system as a reason to leave the Mets back in the day.

If the money was equal, do you honestly believe iHart would have went to the Thunder? I don't, but again, maybe I'm wrong.

the man gave you is thoughts but you disagree...you assume that hes playing politics...you ignore how Ihart played the game before
he played for thibs- yet, thats not enough...
I fully understand the fact that no one owes anyone anything. My disappointment was when there was a possibility that he left for the money. I always held the position that it had nothing to do with the money and was trying to figure out what it was. I used the word "disappointment" because thats what it was. I dont dislike him- I didnt judge him- etc but as a fan I was disappointed.

Once Ihart spoke everything came together and my wisdom told me exactly what it was. Therefore, I was at peace - no longer disappointed.

[JayTWill]

Few things we probably gotta squash in here:

1) $24M is no chump change. For big men, who're bound to suffer injuries at some point in their careers, they should never turn out that type of money. This really is the paramount decision to leave New York and I don't blame IHart.

2) The expanded role narrative is a bit misguided. First off, we have to understand that Clippers situation a little bit clearer. That year, the Clippers did not have a real PG. Their distributors were PG, Eric Bledsoe, and Reggie Jackson. When you have that type of situation, there's more latitude to create with the ball.

Everyone knows that the Thibs offense is much more slowed down and a lot of isolation compared to other teams. Also, big men in particular are not encouraged to expand their game until they focus on the bread and butter. However, that isn't the case across the board all the time. Randle, for example, is a "big man" but he expanded is range exponentially and his passing chops while under Thibs.

However, when your touches are cannibalized by Brunson & Randle, there isn't a runway to pass as often as you did in previous stops.

As for the shooting, that's largely a farce. He was never a serious 3 point shooter with the Clippers. That was never tested across a long time. Him shooting 3s means that he'd not be doing things essential for the Knicks offense, such as grabbing offensive rebounds, setting key screens, etc. etc. That means no floaters. Are you trading that off for maybe shooting 33% from 3 on average volume? Let's be real.

It's true that his expanded role may not have been able to directly translate but he was even limited in a more traditional role as a big man. Our ballhandlers don't really hit the big when rolling down the paint. The bread and butter of a Thibs center is simply to play defense, crash the boards and set screens. There isn't much room for growth for a center. iHart going from the bench in LA to the bench in New York should not have been a limiting factor. The bench here was not stacked with talent when he arrived. The overall team lacked facilitators.

Much of the playmaking we saw iHart contribute were from broken plays when teams denied the ball from our primary ball handlers and he would simply improvise. There were almost no plays called for iHart.

As far as iHart's shooting I agree that it was limited in LA but Thibs did try to take advantage of it when iHart first arrived. He used him as a floor spacer but he stuck him in the corner where he had never taken 3 from in the previous year so he could continue to let others dominate the ball. iHart failed in that role when he barely touched the ball to even get a feel for the game.

I know Thibs' offense relies heavily on certain guys dominating the ball and taking many of the shots. There is limited ball movement which helps limit turnovers and lets guys focus on crashing the glass on control the tempo of the game but that doesn't mean it can't be tweaked to improve.

It's not like Thibs' style has had great postseason success. So, yes I would definitely be open to trying different things in hopes of better results. Personally i'm willing to live with the ups and downs of trying new things in the hopes of improving the ceiling of the team even if it results in less regular season wins. I have seen Thibs' teams come up short in postseason for years for a number of different reasons.

[Context]

Few things we probably gotta squash in here:

1) $24M is no chump change. For big men, who're bound to suffer injuries at some point in their careers, they should never turn out that type of money. This really is the paramount decision to leave New York and I don't blame IHart.

2) The expanded role narrative is a bit misguided. First off, we have to understand that Clippers situation a little bit clearer. That year, the Clippers did not have a real PG. Their distributors were PG, Eric Bledsoe, and Reggie Jackson. When you have that type of situation, there's more latitude to create with the ball.

Everyone knows that the Thibs offense is much more slowed down and a lot of isolation compared to other teams. Also, big men in particular are not encouraged to expand their game until they focus on the bread and butter. However, that isn't the case across the board all the time. Randle, for example, is a "big man" but he expanded is range exponentially and his passing chops while under Thibs.

However, when your touches are cannibalized by Brunson & Randle, there isn't a runway to pass as often as you did in previous stops.

As for the shooting, that's largely a farce. He was never a serious 3 point shooter with the Clippers. That was never tested across a long time. Him shooting 3s means that he'd not be doing things essential for the Knicks offense, such as grabbing offensive rebounds, setting key screens, etc. etc. That means no floaters. Are you trading that off for maybe shooting 33% from 3 on average volume? Let's be real.

It's true that his expanded role may not have been able to directly translate but he was even limited in a more traditional role as a big man. Our ballhandlers don't really hit the big when rolling down the paint. The bread and butter of a Thibs center is simply to play defense, crash the boards and set screens. There isn't much room for growth for a center. iHart going from the bench in LA to the bench in New York should not have been a limiting factor. The bench here was not stacked with talent when he arrived. The overall team lacked facilitators.

Much of the playmaking we saw iHart contribute were from broken plays when teams denied the ball from our primary ball handlers and he would simply improvise. There were almost no plays called for iHart.

As far as iHart's shooting I agree that it was limited in LA but Thibs did try to take advantage of it when iHart first arrived. He used him as a floor spacer but he stuck him in the corner where he had never taken 3 from in the previous year so he could continue to let others dominate the ball. iHart failed in that role when he barely touched the ball to even get a feel for the game.

I know Thibs' offense relies heavily on certain guys dominating the ball and taking many of the shots. There is limited ball movement which helps limit turnovers and lets guys focus on crashing the glass on control the tempo of the game but that doesn't mean it can't be tweaked to improve.

It's not like Thibs' style has had great postseason success. So, yes I would definitely be open to trying different things in hopes of better results. Personally i'm willing to live with the ups and downs of trying new things in the hopes of improving the ceiling of the team even if it results in less regular season wins. I have seen Thibs' teams come up short in postseason for years for a number of different reasons.

Phish you my guy but I think you should check out how Ihart played the game before the nba...
and JayTwill- I couldnt have said it better...

[ezmoney707]

No one will say it was about the money. It was about the money. This other stuff is ancillary.

Maybe it works out for him… maybe not.

He just told you what it was. I knew it wasnt about the money. It was CLEAR to me that he was not HAPPY.
Money doesn't equal happiness. Doesn't matter if its 1 million, 100k, 4 million, etc
Once you pass a certain level- the difference becomes "stuff". He lifestyle wont change much between the 34 million guaranteed and the 58 million guaranteed. Not to mention, he would have made a lot more money in New York.
He wanted to play basketball to his fullest. Period. Ihart has a love for the game.

Let me ask you something...what do you love the most in this world? and/or what gets you the most excited when you do it?


why didnt he take the money?

Read on Twitter

Caleb didn’t take the money because he and his agent thought he could get more, he opted out of his deal because of his agents advice and the Heat were no longer able to offer that same contract per the CBA so he ended up having to take a lesser offer elsewhere.

He needs to fire his agent.

In regard to ihart , I agree with Sol, players never say they left because of the of money, I’m sure an expanded role played a part, but the money is the ultimate reason

[Phish Tank]

Few things we probably gotta squash in here:

1) $24M is no chump change. For big men, who're bound to suffer injuries at some point in their careers, they should never turn out that type of money. This really is the paramount decision to leave New York and I don't blame IHart.

2) The expanded role narrative is a bit misguided. First off, we have to understand that Clippers situation a little bit clearer. That year, the Clippers did not have a real PG. Their distributors were PG, Eric Bledsoe, and Reggie Jackson. When you have that type of situation, there's more latitude to create with the ball.

Everyone knows that the Thibs offense is much more slowed down and a lot of isolation compared to other teams. Also, big men in particular are not encouraged to expand their game until they focus on the bread and butter. However, that isn't the case across the board all the time. Randle, for example, is a "big man" but he expanded is range exponentially and his passing chops while under Thibs.

However, when your touches are cannibalized by Brunson & Randle, there isn't a runway to pass as often as you did in previous stops.

As for the shooting, that's largely a farce. He was never a serious 3 point shooter with the Clippers. That was never tested across a long time. Him shooting 3s means that he'd not be doing things essential for the Knicks offense, such as grabbing offensive rebounds, setting key screens, etc. etc. That means no floaters. Are you trading that off for maybe shooting 33% from 3 on average volume? Let's be real.

It's true that his expanded role may not have been able to directly translate but he was even limited in a more traditional role as a big man. Our ballhandlers don't really hit the big when rolling down the paint. The bread and butter of a Thibs center is simply to play defense, crash the boards and set screens. There isn't much room for growth for a center. iHart going from the bench in LA to the bench in New York should not have been a limiting factor. The bench here was not stacked with talent when he arrived. The overall team lacked facilitators.

Much of the playmaking we saw iHart contribute were from broken plays when teams denied the ball from our primary ball handlers and he would simply improvise. There were almost no plays called for iHart.

As far as iHart's shooting I agree that it was limited in LA but Thibs did try to take advantage of it when iHart first arrived. He used him as a floor spacer but he stuck him in the corner where he had never taken 3 from in the previous year so he could continue to let others dominate the ball. iHart failed in that role when he barely touched the ball to even get a feel for the game.

I know Thibs' offense relies heavily on certain guys dominating the ball and taking many of the shots. There is limited ball movement which helps limit turnovers and lets guys focus on crashing the glass on control the tempo of the game but that doesn't mean it can't be tweaked to improve.

It's not like Thibs' style has had great postseason success. So, yes I would definitely be open to trying different things in hopes of better results. Personally i'm willing to live with the ups and downs of trying new things in the hopes of improving the ceiling of the team even if it results in less regular season wins. I have seen Thibs' teams come up short in postseason for years for a number of different reasons.

Phish you my guy but I think you should check out how Ihart played the game before the nba...
and JayTwill- I couldnt have said it better...

Guys - I like y'all both, but y'all underestimating the money

That's definitely like 90-95% of the reasoning.

[JayTWill]

It's true that his expanded role may not have been able to directly translate but he was even limited in a more traditional role as a big man. Our ballhandlers don't really hit the big when rolling down the paint. The bread and butter of a Thibs center is simply to play defense, crash the boards and set screens. There isn't much room for growth for a center. iHart going from the bench in LA to the bench in New York should not have been a limiting factor. The bench here was not stacked with talent when he arrived. The overall team lacked facilitators.

Much of the playmaking we saw iHart contribute were from broken plays when teams denied the ball from our primary ball handlers and he would simply improvise. There were almost no plays called for iHart.

As far as iHart's shooting I agree that it was limited in LA but Thibs did try to take advantage of it when iHart first arrived. He used him as a floor spacer but he stuck him in the corner where he had never taken 3 from in the previous year so he could continue to let others dominate the ball. iHart failed in that role when he barely touched the ball to even get a feel for the game.

I know Thibs' offense relies heavily on certain guys dominating the ball and taking many of the shots. There is limited ball movement which helps limit turnovers and lets guys focus on crashing the glass on control the tempo of the game but that doesn't mean it can't be tweaked to improve.

It's not like Thibs' style has had great postseason success. So, yes I would definitely be open to trying different things in hopes of better results. Personally i'm willing to live with the ups and downs of trying new things in the hopes of improving the ceiling of the team even if it results in less regular season wins. I have seen Thibs' teams come up short in postseason for years for a number of different reasons.

Phish you my guy but I think you should check out how Ihart played the game before the nba...
and JayTwill- I couldnt have said it better...

Guys - I like y'all both, but y'all underestimating the money

That's definitely like 90-95% of the reasoning.

Oh, i'm definitely not denying money wasn't a huge factor but i'm not on the side of it being either one or the other. He could want a bigger role in a different situation and still really enjoy all the extra money. I'm just saying his role wasn't exactly amazing during his time here and it was probably going to decrease with the roster at full strength this year. In the end when factoring in all things it really wasn't a difficult decision other than maybe some emotional attachments. I'm surely taking the extra $13M per year to play in a great situation. F@ck the immaculate vibes.

[Context]

No one will say it was about the money. It was about the money. This other stuff is ancillary.

Maybe it works out for him… maybe not.

He just told you what it was. I knew it wasnt about the money. It was CLEAR to me that he was not HAPPY.
Money doesn't equal happiness. Doesn't matter if its 1 million, 100k, 4 million, etc
Once you pass a certain level- the difference becomes "stuff". He lifestyle wont change much between the 34 million guaranteed and the 58 million guaranteed. Not to mention, he would have made a lot more money in New York.
He wanted to play basketball to his fullest. Period. Ihart has a love for the game.

Let me ask you something...what do you love the most in this world? and/or what gets you the most excited when you do it?


why didnt he take the money?

Read on Twitter

Caleb didn’t take the money because he and his agent thought he could get more, he opted out of his deal because of his agents advice and the Heat were no longer able to offer that same contract per the CBA so he ended up having to take a lesser offer elsewhere.

He needs to fire his agent.

In regard to ihart , I agree with Sol, players never say they left because of the of money, I’m sure an expanded role played a part, but the money is the ultimate reason

EZ - its says he turned it down a week ago...I knew before Ihart said anything that it had nothing to do with money. Again, he made 16 million over the last two years...He was already a millionaire. But I wont agrue with the side who believes he went for the money
and basically ignore Iharts playing history and the words out of his mouth. I dont think he's a liar.

[Context]

It's true that his expanded role may not have been able to directly translate but he was even limited in a more traditional role as a big man. Our ballhandlers don't really hit the big when rolling down the paint. The bread and butter of a Thibs center is simply to play defense, crash the boards and set screens. There isn't much room for growth for a center. iHart going from the bench in LA to the bench in New York should not have been a limiting factor. The bench here was not stacked with talent when he arrived. The overall team lacked facilitators.

Much of the playmaking we saw iHart contribute were from broken plays when teams denied the ball from our primary ball handlers and he would simply improvise. There were almost no plays called for iHart.

As far as iHart's shooting I agree that it was limited in LA but Thibs did try to take advantage of it when iHart first arrived. He used him as a floor spacer but he stuck him in the corner where he had never taken 3 from in the previous year so he could continue to let others dominate the ball. iHart failed in that role when he barely touched the ball to even get a feel for the game.

I know Thibs' offense relies heavily on certain guys dominating the ball and taking many of the shots. There is limited ball movement which helps limit turnovers and lets guys focus on crashing the glass on control the tempo of the game but that doesn't mean it can't be tweaked to improve.

It's not like Thibs' style has had great postseason success. So, yes I would definitely be open to trying different things in hopes of better results. Personally i'm willing to live with the ups and downs of trying new things in the hopes of improving the ceiling of the team even if it results in less regular season wins. I have seen Thibs' teams come up short in postseason for years for a number of different reasons.

Phish you my guy but I think you should check out how Ihart played the game before the nba...
and JayTwill- I couldnt have said it better...

Guys - I like y'all both, but y'all underestimating the money

That's definitely like 90-95% of the reasoning.

With all due respect he already had money Phish- 16 million dollars of it. Yall act like he wasnt a millionaire already.

[Context]

bottom line - I'm going with Ihart the man who left for OKC. Not opinions.